Skip to main content

Full text of "Staff data and materials on social services proposals"

See other formats


//34/q-lb 






94th Congress 1 
2d Session / 



COMMITTEE PBINT 



Staff Data and Materials on 

Social Services Proposals 



68-800 



Prepared by the Staff for the Use of the 

COMMITTEE ON FINANCE 
UNITED STATES SENATE 

Russell B. Long, Chairman 




MAY 6, 1976 



V • 1 ° 






;* 






><wx//''' 



Printed for the use of the Committee on Finance 



U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
WASHINGTON : 1976 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing'Office 
Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 55 cents 



SOCIAL SERVICES PROPOSALS: BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY 

Legislation in 1972 

Rapid rise in Federal funds for social services. — Like Federal matching 
for welfare payments, Federal matching for social services prior to fiscal 
year 1973 was mandatory and open-ended. Every dollar a State spent for 
social services was matched by three Federal dollars. In 1971 and 1972 
particularly, States made use of the Social Security Act's open-ended 75 
percent matching to increase at a rapid rate the amount of Federal money 
going into social services programs. 

The Federal share of social services was about three-quarters of a billion 
dollars in fiscal year 1971, about $1.7 billion in 1972, and was projected 
to reach an estimated $4.7 billion for fiscal year 1973. Faced with this 
projection, the Congress enacted a limitation on Federal funding as a 
provision of the State and Local Fiscal Assistance Act of 1972. 

Federal funds for social services limited in 1972. — Under the provision in 
the 1972 legislation, Federal matching for social services to the aged, 
blind, and disabled, and for services provided under the program of aid to 
families with dependent children was subjected to a State-by-State dollar 
limitation, effective beginning fiscal year 1973. Each State is limited to its 
share of $2.5 billion based on its proportion of population in the United 
States. 

Services necessary to enable AFDC recipients to participate in the work 
incentive program are not subject to the limitation described above; 
they continue, as under prior law, with 90 percent Federal matching and 
with funding of these services limited to the amounts appropriated. 

1973 Regulations Limiting Social Services Programs 

In 1973, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare proposed to 
completely revamp the regulations governing the operations of the social 
services program. In part, these regulations were intended to implement 
the 1972 legislation which had limited funding to $2.5 billion and had 
imposed certain other requirements. However, the HEW proposals went 
far beyond what was called for by the legislation. In addition to imposing a 
number of new administrative and procedural requirements on the State 
welfare departments, the HEW regulations would have changed the basic 
nature of the social services program by greatly curtailing the types of 
services which could be provided and by restricting eligibility for services 
to those individuals who were actually on welfare or who had incomes 
which were quite close to the welfare eligibility level. 

(1) 



Before the new regulations could become effective, legislation was 
enacted prohibiting their implementation since the extensive nature of the 
proposed changes clearly required legislative rather than administrative 
resolution. 

Senate Action on Social Services in 1973 and 1974 

In late 1973, the issue of revisions in the social services program was 
considered by the Committee on Finance. The legislation reported to the 
Senate by the committee would have retained the requirements of prior 
law which obligated the States to provide services to welfare recipients to 
help them attain self-sufficiency. However, the bill would have specifically 
eliminated any Federal restrictions on the types of social services which 
States could provide or any limits on the income of individuals applying for 
services. In other words, to the extent any State had an allocation of 
Federal social services funds exceeding what was needed to meet its obliga- 
tions to welfare recipients, the State would have been free under the 1973 
Finance Committee bill to use those funds for whatever services to what- 
ever individuals the State found appropriate. 

The Senate approved the committee's revenue-sharing approach with 
two amendments. One of the amendments would have specifically required 
that certain Federal standards be met in the case of any child care services 
supported by Federal social services funds. The second amendment would 
have required States to provide at least three types of services (determined 
by the States) for the aged, blind, and disabled. 

Subsequent to Senate passage of the bill, the House of Representatives 
declined to meet in conference on the legislation during the remainder of 
1973 and during 1974. Toward the end of 1974, however, the House 
passed a separate social services bill. The Finance Committee substituted 
its revenue-sharing approach to services for the House bill and the Senate 
again agreed to the committee proposal. The conference agreement reached 
on this matter, however, largely followed the House approach except that 
the Senate floor amendment requiring three types of services for the aged, 
blind, and disabled was adopted, as was the Senate version of child care 
standards (which w r ere somewhat less stringent than those in the House 
bill). 

The Social Services Amendments of 1974 

The conference agreement reached at the end of 1974 on social services 
legislation was enacted as Public Law 93-647, the Social Services Amend- 
ments of 1974. This legislation removed social services programs from their 
prior close connection with cash public assistance programs and set up a 
separate social services title in the Social Security Act — title XX. In 
general, the new law represented a compromise between the earlier ad- 
ministration approach of narrowly limiting the types of services which 
could be provided and the types of individuals to whom they could be 



provided and the approach in the Senate bill which would have left these 
decisions almost entirely to the States. 

Types of services. — The new title XX social services law sets forth five 
goals which the program is supposed to serve : 

(1) achieving or maintaining economic self-support to prevent, 
reduce, or eliminate dependency, 

(2) achieving or maintaining self-sufficiency, including reduction 
or prevention of dependency, 

(3) preventing or remedying neglect, abuse, or exploitation of 
children and adults unable to protect their own interests, or preserving, 
rehabilitating or reuniting families, 

(4) preventing or reducing inappropriate institutional care by 
providing for community-based care, home-based care, or other forms 
of less intensive care, or 

(5) securing referral or admission for institutional care when other 
forms of care are not appropriate, or providing services to individuals 
in institutions. 

The law specifically provides, however, that the decision as to whether 
a given service actually does serve one of the goals is a matter for State 
determination and not subject to review by the Department of Health, 
Education, and Welfare. However, the new law contains a listing of certain 
types of services which are specifically ineligible for Federal funding under 
the program. These include construction of facilities, cash benefits, medical 
and institutional services except in certain circumstances, and certain types 
of educational services. 

Eligibility for services. — The regulations issued by the Department of 
Health, Education, and Welfare in 1973 would have established firm 
income limitations on social services programs so that services could have 
been provided only to actual welfare recipients or to individuals with 
incomes quite close to the welfare level. The Senate bill would have left to 
the States the determination of what income limits, if any, to impose on 
service recipients who were not eligible for welfare. Title XX adopted the 
approach of setting absolute income limitations (except for referral services 
and protective services) on services to nonwelfare recipients, but it set 
these limits at much higher levels. The new law permits States to provide 
social services only to individuals with incomes below 115 percent of State 
median income (relative to family size), and fees must be charged for 
services to individuals with incomes above 80 percent of State median 
income (relative to family size). 

Program administration. — Prior to 1974 social services programs were part 
of the cash public assistance programs. These programs were administered 
by the States through their welfare departments (or through local welfare 
departments under State supervision). The State developed a plan for 
each program which it submitted to the Department of Health, Education, 



and Welfare. A plan once approved remained in force, although amend- 
ments to it could be made from time to time. 

The new title XX social services program departs substantially from this 
traditional welfare model. While the new title XX requires State plans to 
include many of the elements of assistance plans under other titles (e.g. 
appeal procedures, merit personnel systems, disclosure safeguards), it 
departs from past practice by requiring each State to redevelop its plan 
annually. The present statute requires public notification of the plan 
contents, a period for the acceptance of comments, and specifies the items 
to be covered (e.g. types of services to be provided, categories of individuals 
to be served, geographic availability of services, etc.). HEW regulations 
expand upon these provisions by requiring States to publish descriptions 
of the plan in display advertisements in the newspaper having widest 
circulation in each geographic area of the State, the establishment of toll- 
free telephone service to answer inquires on the plan, and similar require- 
ments designed to assure wide public availability. 

Limitation on funding. — The new title XX social services program retains 
the overall $2.5 billion annual limit on social services funding as enacted 
in 1972. This is allocated among the States on the basis of population and 
unused amounts are not reallocated. (Under the 1974 legislation, provision 
was made for a portion of any unused funds to be made available to the 
territories with these limits: Puerto Rico — $15 million, Guam and the 
Virgin Islands — $0.5 million each). 

The Question of Group Eligibility 

Under the social services programs as they existed prior to the 1974 
amendments, States sometimes provided certain services to members of 
groups without requiring an individual determination of eligibility. For 
example, services provided through a senior citizen center would be made 
available to all elderly persons without any requirement that the individual 
demonstrate that he was a welfare recipient or that his income was below a 
certain level. Similarly, a family planning clinic might be established to 
serve all residents of a low-income neighborhood, and the services would be 
provided without individual income determinations. 

The 1974 Senate approach to services would have left States free to con- 
tinue such practices as they found appropriate. The legislation which was 
enacted, however, specifically requires that services be provided only to 
persons with incomes below certain limits. This requirement can be 
complied with only if the income of those served is, in fact, determined. 
The regulations originally issued by the Department of Health, Education, 
and Welfare, therefore, required that when the title XX program became 
effective on October 1, 1975, States would have to determine the income 
eligibility of recipients. 

Because of objections raised by various groups and particularly by the 
aged, the Department subsequently modified this regulation to permit 



States which had been making group eligibility determinations in the 
quarter prior to the October 1, 1975 effective date to defer coming into 
compliance with the law until March 31, 1976. Then, in February of 1976, 
the Department again modified this regulation to permit States which had 
come into compliance with the new law to revert to noncompliance if they 
had used group eligibility determinations in any of the three quarters 
preceding October 1, 1975. Again, the Department said that it would 
permit noncompliance only through March 31, 1976. 

Under the program of Aid to Families with Dependent Children, regula- 
tions require that eligibility be redetermined once every six months. The 
March 31,1 976 cutoff date in the group eligibility regulation seems to have 
been chosen by the Department on the basis of analogy since it is six months 
after the October 1, 1975 effective date of title XX. However, there is no 
statutory basis for allowing group eligibility determinations before but not 
after March 31, 1976. 

The States which use group eligibility are : Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Mich- 
igan, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, and Pennsylvania. 

H.R. 12455 {extension of regulations). — On March 16, 1976, the House of 
Representatives passed H.R. 12455. This bill would extend the operation of 
the departmental regulations beyond March 31 and up to September 30, 
1976. This would allow States which are now providing social services on a 
group eligibility basis to continue to do so for an additional 6 months. 
The House report indicates an intention to pass additional legislation 
before the expiration of that period. While the House report does not 
specifically indicate what that further legislation will be, it seems likely 
that it will involve some form of further relief from the current law 
requirements. 

Alternative proposals. — Since there appears to be no intention under the 
House bill ever to fully enforce the existing law mandate for individual 
income determinations as a condition of Federal social services funding, 
the committee may wish to consider a permanent revision in this 
requirement. 

One approach to permanent revisions is contained in S. 2157, introduced 
by Senator Javits, which would permanently permit group eligibility 
decisions for certain types of services provided to the aged. This approach 
would eliminate the problem as it affects the group apparently most 
strongly interested in this change. However, there are other types of services 
which are provided on a group eligibility basis (e.g. family planning). States 
might want to modify this proposal to permit other specified services to be 
exempted from individual income tests. 

Another approach would be to permit all States wishing to provide social 
services on a group eligibility basis to do so. This is the approach employed 
in the social services revision bill which has been submitted to Congress 
by the administration. This proposal was introduced by Senator Curtis as 
S. 3061. 

68-S00 — 76 2 



G 

If the commhtee wishes, the question of whether Federal income limits 
should be continued at all could be considered. The approach taken by the 
committee and the Senate in 1973 and 1974 would have left the decision 
of setting eligibility limits and determining whether those limits were met 
entirely to State option. Since the question of eligibility for services is one 
of the central issues involved in social services policy, the committee might 
wish to consider whether other changes in the program should be made. 
The major alternatives to the present law approach are the revenue- 
sharing approaches contained in the administration proposal and in the 
1973 and 1974 Senate bills. The Administration bill would eliminate 
State matching requirements, require that child care meet State instead of 
Federal standards, remove all requirements relating to fees for services, 
and increase the amount of Federal funds which must be targeted toward 
welfare and other low-income families. The approach in the 1973-1974 
Finance Committee bills would retain State matching requirements and 
Federal standards for child care services. Otherwise it would allow States 
complete flexibility as to the type of services to be provided and the eligibil- 
ity requirements to be imposed. These two approaches are compared with 
present law in the table on page 9. 

Regulations governing eligibility determinations. — On April 2, 1976, the De- 
partment of Health, Education, and Welfare issued revised regulations for 
the social services program which eliminate requirements that applicants 
for services provide sufficient information and documentation to "lead a 
reasonable person to conclude" that they meet the eligibility requirements. 
Instead, the new regulations authorize the States to employ whatever 
eligibility determination procedures they wish, "including a declaration 
method." The April 2 regulations also delete a requirement that applica- 
tions for services be made subject to penalty for perjury and substitute a 
requirement that applicants certify that they are giving correct information. 

While the new HEW regulations do not permit group eligibility deter- 
minations, they do authorize States to use a much less rigorous eligibility 
determination procedure than was previously required. 

Child Care 

Earlier this year, the committee approved legislation which would 
retain the basic child care standards in the social services statute but would 
ease their implementation by providing additional funding at a rate of 
$250 million per year and by granting certain waivers in the case of facili- 
ties serving only a few federally funded children. The bill also proposed 
to provide added tax credit incentives for the employment of welfare 
recipients in child care jobs. In addition, the bill contained a section 
making permanent some temporary social services provisions related to the 
treatment of drug addicts and alcoholics. 



The bill as reported by the Committee was approved by the Senate. 
The provisions of the Senate bill were essentially accepted by the House of 
Representatives but, for reasons related to the Congressional budget 
process, on a temporary basis only — through September 30, 1976. This 
modified bill was vetoed by the President and the veto was sustained in 
the Senate on May 5 by a vote of 60 to 34. 

When the child care legislation was under consideration by the com- 
mittee, a motion was made by Senator Packwood to amend the bill to 
provide for the elimination of Federal child care staffing requirements. 
This motion was defeated on a vote of 9 to 9. During Senate consideration 
of the measure, Senator Packwood offered an amendment which was 
similar to his motion in committee except that the floor amendment would 
also have eliminated any requirement that the additional funding be used 
for child care services. Under the amendment, the additional funding and 
the provisions related to tax credits for hiring welfare recipients would 
have been retained. 

A more detailed description of the bill as previously approved by the 
committee and the Senate is printed on page 23. 

CHILD CARE CENTER STAFFING REQUIREMENTS UNDER LAW 
AND HEW REGULATION 

Maximum 

number of 

children 

per staff 

Age of child member 

Under 6 weeks 1 Required by regulation. 

6 weeks to 3 years 4 Required by regulation. 

3 to 4 years 5 Required by law. 

4 to 6 years 7 Required by law. 

6 to 9 years 15 1 Maximum number allowed by 

10 to 14 years 20 J law (though Secretary of 

HEW may lower the maxi- 
mum number of children 
per staff member, thus in- 
creasing the staff required). 






Appendix A 



Comparison of Social Services Provisions: Present Law, 1974 Senate 
Bill, Administration Proposal (S. 3061) 



in 

o 

Q. 
O 



n 
o 

<3 

l- 
+-» 

tn 
'E 

1 

< 



£9 

RS 

C 

o 



m 

.*2 
e 

if) 



a. 

E 
© 
o 



/>-"» 








<X> 




O 




CO 




CO 








"to 




to 









Q. 




O 




i_ 




Q. 




C 




O 




'+-• 




CO 




i_ 




+-> 




to 




'c 




E 




T3 




< 






c 


15 





CD 


"■5 


4-> 

CO 


N 


c 


'Z 


03 





CO 




^J- 


3 


r^ 


< 


en 


. 


1-1 


«H 


5 




co 








4-> 




c 




03 




to 




o> 




i_ 




CL 





to •„ 
o>o 



.i D) CO 0) 

•a c 03 to 

o>.- >jo 
Q- co h u 



CD W T3 
00 O) 



C CD 
03 "O 

l§ 

JO a) 

<u o 



> O) 



cd.E 



c o»- 



■jz c 



-3 G> c 

<o o« 



«l 



a) 






8.J2 



CO 



0) 



a) <uX| 



•*■ S ro >- 5 
cd o 



CO 

CD ' 

-a 



°. O CO O $3 Jr C « 



o ii ^J 3 .- u oo 



x CO 

c 
c 



-t-> 



o 



IVJ 


1 j 




x: 


-O 




00 


C 







0) 






RS 




+-* 


■M 




i_ 






ca 


ca 




O 


O 




E 


~3 




O) Q. 




75 


■— 




c 


3 




O) 




!c 


in 




03 

a) 


c 







CL) 




c 




-*-> 


O 








CO 




Ll_ 


ca 




E 


> 

a 





T3 

CL; 








in 


O 
d 

Z> 
O 


T3 


i— 


'/■> 


0) 

■a 





CD 


O 


03 


a) 

Li. 




CO 


O" 


09 


c 


> 






O 


"c 


a> 


O 





Lf) 




CO 


'3 


0T 






V7 


i_ 




OT 


CO 


03 

N 


^ 


O 


a 









03 


c 


TJ 


=5 


b 


O 


~ 





> 


->-> 


cnx: 


C 


CO 

> 


O 


-.' 


c 


3 


O 

01 


CL 


C 


'53 


< 


03 


O 




Q-O 




Q. Q. 



g_£"S> 
co o co fz 

cj I r- v_ 
N — -o 

!§£§ 

-t-> -4-> CO "O 

3 j_ oj CD 
CO <u O N 

« c ^ ° 

CO -3 CD -C 

co iflt; 

~2t5o3 
E o>< $= 

CO o ^ «o 

* °-- <U 
**-0 3n 

coQ o co 

CD U_ Q) 0-) 
OC/3-Q 



O CO 

©C/3 
+3 o 

CD 

-a co 

n 

"So 

■- ' 
00 

.c< 
3 

CO ^> 

CO g 
(0 0J 
8^00 

>-8 

0)~ > 

" J O CD 

G0C0 

(ID 



■_*T 03 O 0) 
O °"E-£-C 
O CO 2 CD*" 

ir> "to ca 3 -a 
w-° 5) <o 

■=£ o E 

3 +- co ^ ca 

" ,OCJ 



03 O 
£ 00 

£ 0) 

O "co 



N °. o 



^ Oq £ 



■£ w £ o o 

CD CD^LO g 

00. o 

= - ^^° 

w c.2o - 
E S-2W-? 

co S ^-^ c 
03 ro O CO "O co 
T3 O O-'Z C OT 
•>0 Q.C0 — 

00 a>o c 

Q_ O CO CL O P 
O •♦-' Q. -- ._ 

ocn caCi:> 



■^. = '. C33TJ-0 ' O 03 

co^9.i 3 «-- S-S-2 

CD cO= 03 E O Jj 03 

"3 — oo-Qco^-o 1 - 

a 5 »£? o".S2 »- o 

^ CO c = O 00 CD "^ 

- >_ «- ^-2 W 3 E 

cd_ a*- x c^ cn^ 



^ 00 55^'-^ co a 



o t! 



+J 


cn 


03 




1 — 1 


il 


'> 


03 


O 


w 


c/> 


> 








TJ 




""^ 


■■'.' 


W 


03 
03 

c 





CD 


'.-) 


CO 


C 
•-3 
O 





JZ 


-- 

c 

3 


Co 




'cc 


*-> 


D) 

C 
O 

E 

CO 

c-s 
CD 


£ 
< 


o3 




03 


T3 

C 
CO 


O 


n 
O 


M- 3 


O 


C 
O 
13 

ca 


■rz 00 
3 O 


O 

cr 



O 
O 

O 


u 


_ 


O 


03 


'-;— ' 


LO 



"co 







CL 
03 


C 

cc 


ca 



cu 


s8 












00 

"5 


00 

03 

ca 


CU 

v. 
O 


C^° 


C/l 









.#> 







CO 

ca 

-O 
CD 


00 


ffl 


O . 


'> 

O 

0- 





>»X»i 



in 


J2 


^aila 
30,0 
lane 



03 >0 

y>^L3 coO 






12 



o 

■*-< 

re 

S 



ro 



10 

■o 

c 


CD 

c 


3r 


s— 


o 




-*- 1 




CO 


to 


E 


03 

-a 


CD 


0) 


Q 


LL 


-*-< 




co 


tO 


v_ 


CD 
T3 


O 


> 


C 


O 


CD 


DL 


E 




a 




V- 


-5 


'5 


"5 


cr 


E 


a 


£ 


c 


O) CO 


c 


+-> 


CJ 


=3 
O 


-t-l 


-C 



5i 



en 

03 
CD 
E 

co 
CO 

-2 
"5 

E 

C 



• oj >^ • 

CD— CD CD 
U- "O >L1_ 

CD c 13 CD 

CD ±; cd <D"n-P 
q. to q. to ^ co 

in o--o B w ^: 
^ '> "O O •- co O 
.„ C- CD C — O 
CD D) C? C 0)0 



00 



T5 CD 

to o c 

CD +- 1 

a^ w 



to r- +-* CD CD 
^- CD CD +j 



0) 



.25 5 



"S/Eoi 

re ^-s CD ■*-" CD 
mO W U)U 

t c o -o — 

«££«! 

, -m CD to h 

c s- to ag 

O <D 3 rs £ 

'■c £ <D o ■- 

^ CD r CD > • 

5 SEE? 2! 

CD CD c .E~ 

■§-££« 

•2§.eS 

42 **" ^5 "a 

*■ c cd — 

a, O-qCO 
cd -.p ~ co 

> — ^ c 

Q. W+jQ 
C ili- 

•2 o E < 

'JS'* - ' to o 
■t; ,« cd 

C CC CO CD 
C.2 C CD 

■§«> w 

6 .E a> -o 



c ^cd-d — 



-_ o 



■S w S-Si5.So -5 5S 



E"°" 5 

„ m O 

<S to « 

*-£ coQ P. 

CO _ CD U_ E 

V CO U< >, 

xj >-•-„. ca 



CD 




o^cd.^ - 

" CD CO CD >> 

C Of- *- C 
^ .O +-> -O O CD 



SI tail 

CO 0)0 +-i CD CO 

E cm w 



O CD 

a> co 

c 



CD -m O CD to CO 



a cp ._(/)■ 

CD ?'C0 



P^S 



xcept 
ide a 
ns of 
tially 
meet 
uire- 


be considered are the geo- 
hich the service is provided, 
:s of the community to which 
e nature of the service, the 
■ than income) of eligibility 
ther factors. The State must 


same as present law e: 
allowing a State to prov 
ndividual determinatio 
oncludes that substan 
who receive the service 
income limitation req 


the 
sion 
out i 

it c 
sons 
cent 


s to 
in w 
ristic 
d F th 
other 
or o 


nerally, 
a provi 
ce vyith 
bility if 
the per: 
L15 per 


. Factor 
hie area 
haracte 
provide 
itions ( 
ceive it, 


Ge 

adds 
servi 
eligil 
all of 
the : 


ment 
grap 
the c 
it is 
cond 
to re 


o is 

erv- 
and 
SSI 




-E w to o 






C C 




Ore.2"cD 




c t: Q--D 




.2 g o > 

•JZ u CD O 




KJ JT ^ ^ 




C 3Q CD 

E ou --o 




4-J ZZ o tO 






CD (0+i =3 




■v .-a e 

CD w CD 






+-" CD "O tO 




CO O-- CD 




co > o .2 




^ CD Q.^ 

O tO CD 




*♦- , O to 




to ^T-Q . 




CD O^f- to 

■a"- to o-m 




•- (D 3 w ^- 




II! If 





E +-■ cd -t; 

j- c: co 

cd +e "-^ "O to 

-t-" to dj c i- 

CD O A) =5 O 

■° E-5 

CD to § £ t; 
> — S o CO 
£- CO o o 

3 3 m w 

— > ja,_ cd 
co ~ co m •— 
3 T3 ^ rx 2- 
£ .E Hd +^ 'u 

c CD CO CD 

o E ro 

^-> • — tO CD s- . 
«"C <D CqJ CD 



©.£2cn£ 



.«2 ^ 

to CD - 

to to w 

CD 
CD^T3 



C E' 3 CO 
C0 4H O-CD 



W-O^ CD o >,£ 

E 



o 

CJ> i- C CD 

c o. o ti -J2 ■ - ro 






CD 



*- c ^£ .e-o 
w fc 5Z ,: *' o c 

£i2 Oh- O ^ 

°> «-+, o.E c 

i_ 13 _ r- O 

g "O § c>«05 

O^ Q-cd £ CD C 

O j_ f-- LO CO <p C 
•J3 CD JS r-l s- •- 
^^CO-CD^O 

■o o -m-o **■ i— t; 

ro „r ro cd cd 45 

CO — CD O tO 



>4£ 

cdH= 

to J3 
OCT 

>~ 

■m CD 

o o 



£ O O 



13 



a> x> 
k. 

> co 

f. cd 

— CO 

■M C 

si 

CO .3 

Q. . co 
_ <d c 
.E-- o 

N — "ZZ 

1 81 

o $"0 

i_ to c 
Q- 1» ca 
a) o yj 

cd a £ 
■£ cd 

CD o i_ 

"cd^'5 

Q OCT 
C 0) 



s§li° 

ojz4r co to 

> crcD.Ei: 
a>£E*H= 
" £<» ° 

)= 5 g CD = 



£ « 5 



CO O o 

CD »_ •*- 

CD O CD 3 +-. 

£ c a ? 5 
•,-= ca o a) 
.2 tt w O 

Q.^ <0 gXi 
CO ></)-C CO . 

■?^-£ ° co a 
n: 5 ca i_ X) k. 



5: u C r >» id >» 






i'S5 



_ CO 

CD O C 

o)= "o ra £ ±s *■ o 
*■ 5 ^ c/) ~_ •- TJ w 

0^0)0*. fcg>a 
fi}3+j.,3oC0— . 

^ 0.0 <D fcf c ° -n ■ 

m-3-S <£ a) a) CD^±? 

El -c a O»>» w §; 

#« .. m n fli IVJ a_i — 



cu 5: Oqq^x: EE") 
£45 ©©-en .2" 

(0O^<B™£WO 

a> 3©^ opc5^ 

"3 O+^Xi CD 

o^ZE 

> w o a o 

CL CD « > O 

O X CD C 



CO-Q 



o 

c (0- (fl 
— — <D CD 

~(DOO 



CD CD CD CD 

£^r xi 

■ M > * J -*-> 

co O^ to 

d) i- ° ^ 

3 CO f^ CO 

C 3 CD tt) 

E £^ o 



CD C 

„ cotj 
3 "5.® 

> CO.h 

^ ■•-' -7-1 

COO) 13 
"~ CD « 

CO fQ CD 
CD r- CO 



CO > 



o . 
coiG 
CD C 

Q. CD 



Dl£,h 


+-> 


C/5 


ro C CO 

., 1- cu 




CD CD — 


CO 


CD 


E ~^ 


CO 


■o 


CO 3 CO 


o 


> 


CO CTu 


a> o 


CD O 


m 


a 


■- ° « 




ide at least 3 
of SSI. 

s may provide 
State deter- 


OjC.9 




rspe 
ve w 
w pri 




O +-> CO 

*- ca — 




SS-5 




rovi 

nd 

red 






> CO CD.C 




pro 
ient 
Stat 
eac 


q. CO- 
CO "D o- 




c- a, 




O C 2 --*-" ,„ 


cox: j- 




CJ _r- CO 

co cd±; 


"5.° CO 




3€g 

<o ca , n 




State 
s for r 
rwi se- 
rvices 


4Jfl)W 




"£ o 




CO CD CD CD 


ca^o 




<u or w 


£ coQ 




requir 
f servi 
desot 
ocial 


© .~ < 
•3 >C0 


X 
X 


Requ 
ied sei 
eceive 


-f-l 


Also 
pes o 
Provi 
ch s 


o 


>^ 3 


S— i_ 


-f-> 


+-> CO 



t; / "" s ^ cd *- c 
oc\j >»ii o o 
^v-'.-t: co *♦- iz 

C — C ° CO T3 
CO CO ^ _ CD~ 

u o F co ox: 

D) D) 3 C > O 
C +J c o »- 

a Oo^ wo 



c -_" CO * 

- C oj CD 

<- ^ O m 

CD "D > O 



3 "h W £ CO 



CD <2 

*- S: o 






" W O) 

. - .E <■> o 
£=: co >,> 

<d o^p^^ 

^r ^-'CO c"^ CD 



co^ 

CO 

CD 

o 

> 

CD 



O.^ U O CO^ 



.2 CD O >; 3 c 



<*J (ft ,A — VU 

»- — — » O O 

CI CO CD— C 
Q. o co 5— -o 
ca cn^. g,co^ 
a . en o ^ cd sz 

S E CD CD .2 O 

'^ *- 3 > 
o > CO co »_ - 

vOcjUOC 

CD h^ ._ CD _■ "O 
c CD E °° CO 3: 

4-1 h Q CJ) O 



o 

u .— •+- 

^•3 

CD -"O 

to CO CO 

CD v_ 

25 CD O o 

..2 >^ 

Wtt ^ CO 
CD O D)'> 

c a.E^ 

o s- ca co 
CD C07; +; 
ao 0-5 

CO »» >»-o 

x:£~co 

+-> CO C i_ 

'^ O CO o 



>^cb 

si = 

^ sz-o 

CD - CD 
^- CO 



>§ 



CD Q. 

CO CO 

** s 

c CO 

cd +t: 

3 ,,? 



CD"0 CD-m 



CO O ^ 



u 



co-o 



£■555 
5 Sis'- 

Cj 3 CD CD 

cd S ±i 

III? 

CD s-^ CD 

co «^ ^ E 

CD ?U^ co 

F-- to c 

r'O.iiE 



CD 

E S? 



en ca 

3 O) 

£75 -^ 

3 *_ 

o o 

^CD 

r en 



co 



CO 

CD 

o £ 
> = 

CD 3 

co 1 *- 



3 tO 
O CD 

~ o 




^•ic2!bc3.EaE^ 



♦* O — ■♦-'J-s-O — h r- w 



£0 
£3 

CD 

o)x: 
.E5 



•- O CO 

^ Si cd 



^ 



-O CD 

3 
CO 



E-2 £ TJ 
o c -£ ¥-3 ca 



3 -SZ CD CO 

O CO 

-^ t! co ca 

tO > h_ 



O O to (J — H- 



Su>° E.23 30 ^c o,aj 

liloilil^is 

in ._ t T _ n n m m ^- o CO 






3 n CD 

CO CD »- 

H to _ 



■P *"-3 



> c ex: 35 00 w 1- 



^ o a co 

O— ™>J3 
Q.-Q 3 ■" CD 



ScS^^xl -°o^-^£Ecd c5 
u cd o >, .r-M-F 3 (t, o >.P 



O 3) Q.CM 



~ o o S ° 



>r03 O - a, ^ CD o 



cd-x: 
r= to 

3 
CD 

> o 

3 H- 

co 



CO ._ 

o.E^^S 

a— CD Q-CD 
CO 



»+; ca jo -o 



■f ca 3 



CO 



%'^2 ^s-sl «»!.= £ 

^.2cjc cC0c E a oro 

73 3 *- y c ffl ^ 3 ■- ^,._ 

•og-^CD-3-O 
— CO 



^xit: 353 

O ^ ° • O 
O CO Q.-D.3 

""rt 3 <1)3h- C0T3 1- CO ^ CO 
s^CO Q.C0 O 3 ca Ql_._^ 



CO E 

OT -n 



c to c o3i 

CD -^ •- -r 3 

>- .— "^ Cl T5 »- 

«T3 co"cdco.£ 

CD 3 C tO^-, CO 

, Sgj8'" i 

CO 



CD _ 3 
to (j -T3 o 
<D r: co cd ■— 

- CO — co CO 

»- CD-O CD 3 
CD-M CO >- ^ 

to c o 

©go c.E 
»- 3 ca 
S„ to w 

O-O cd 3> CD 
^ 3 o 3 O 



3? 

F>o22 

r »- en 



■0*0 = 



CO 



x:x:-o 

O O CO 



J_, i_ — i- 

3 CD CO CD 

<D to^b to 

E » «r c 

CD »- f 3 
CT)C0 CD CD 

co cJ.y E 

3 ^ > >> 

gca^cB- 



68-800—76 3 



14 



/— s 








ID 




O 




CO 




CO 








"co 




CO 




o 




Q. 




O 




i_ 




Q. 




C 




o 




V-> 




(0 




1. 




+J 




CO 




'c 




E 




■a 




< 










c 




o 




v 


!5 


I 




o 


a> 


u 


•*-> 




ca 


'> 


c 


a. 


CD 


O 


CO 


CO 


«tf 


o 


r^ 




CT> 

t-H 


CO 

c 








*£ 








Ifi 


5 




J2 




-t-" 




c 




Q) 




CO 




CU 




i_ 




a. 





CD 4, C 
c £ O 
"F co:3 
.E to co 

T3 to 

CO a3~ 
jo co 

111 
.2 E o 

co ^ 
o-- c 

3 F CD 

7-1 E ^ 



c 


c 


0) 


CD 


0) 


u 


.. 


o 


"> 


00 






2 


CD 

c 


CU 

to 


- 






T3 


ro 


CO 


a) 


CD 


u 


CD O 


♦J 

Ifl 

o 


c 


■a 






c 


~B 


ca 


ta 



J5 CO _ Q-T3 



CJ 



'0 



-m CO CO CO co 



0) 



o-o 

CD c 



^E 



*" J- C0T3 o-ca CO E 
>^ co q_ co co a\ +-< 
= w cojQ fJ^ w co 

c i- ~ -+- 1 c -C ^ 
5J.E.2.W ca 



jo a 



-C 
>, 



*z 



«*. "E ro 



£.2 2 

CO 3 O 

CJ-D^ 

.2 «Jt) 

a ° is 

<* 00 ro 

co o 

.2> CO 

SS.3 



CO CO "^ -^ — ■— +j 

££ ca ca o ^ c £■ 
s- ^ O) o £ '« y 

coco^^E^ 
coco-D^co> ca 

> > ro co t. °° co 

^ co E££ i-to £ 
oocococd-^ 



co -a 

fig-" 

ca co — co 
-o co co 

■S.EroS 

2^ CD -3 

u co -* to 

m_ y s co c 

°-=E8 



c 

CD 

E 
>i 
o _ 

Q. co oo ca 



._ -^ co 

L^25CD 

O c cj-- 

*" P > F 



.co ca o£ 



co x: b"0 

co +- Q-- 

CD c ~" 

CO CO ca 



CO CO CO 



u co co o 2 



CD +- -C r- CO 
co CO ■$ •- oo 



A i -o CO CO .J. 

■§«■££:£ "j? 



CO CO > .j. 



«!•! j*e 



o 



c > W 2S 



C"D-CwO)o5 
c CO CD 



^-5^^ 



■^ co - ;e a u "a co - £ 



ro-^ c£ 3 

U ^ CD ."ti +^ 



c c 






Q-9 



o-o. 



££2 £ "S-nS5ro«' 



> ca 

co ^- . 
co o CO 

^^ CO 
O O^ »- g)CO 



C 0) 

CO o 

9 co 



(j ~ — "' s- 
•C .2 ~ « CD ° 

a,-- co-> ^_, co 



; +3 c 

.« o — 



"S" 



=5 •- >-° 'o " 



^SclcoE 73 --^'"" 3 



co ~ — 
3 ca co 



c co _ ro 

m -t-" -£- JZ 

<d ° ro fo - § -o £ $ -o 

c C'q.E'o o Q-co c 3 
=j co o co x acr cB 

o — Q-+2 co co o c a 



5 « CO CO CO 

•°; § ^- 

o g OCO CO CO 

a d. £ « « 



Isg 






CO ^T CO 

CO •— CO 

+^T3 ~ CO > 
C CO l 



o o 



CD 



CO 4- +-- TX 
Jr CO C CD o 
O- O CD C vil CO 

— -O Q.3 ro O) 
co g.E ^CO^ 

c E -n co i 
o co o _g 5 co 

i. "^ r CO CO r- 
~ CO ^_, <j 

^^"'^CO^ 

00 0.2^.2^ 

> M -T3 



C.i 



co 



o CO •- 



,_ <JJ - r- 00 

Q..E co ,,, E co 

CO +J +-> *- c- 

~ CO C c CD E 



c8 

.2 CO 
s- -5 CD 
— TJJC 

CD x E 

o 



Q. 

Eo 
8 <"-2 

00 9-™ 

CO >^.C£> 

ro^-cB 

00 CJ CO 

'E ® 

CD > O 

■'-' CO s- 
CO C fD 

co-- CO 
> E co 

CO ^ -M 

CO CD 3 

— ' CD ^ 
T3 CO 



.2 C CD 



TJ 

CD 


ro 


ro 


CLC 


E 


j^ 


■a 


k. 


.— 


c 


o 


E 


JO 


H— 


Z5 


CD 1 *- 


CO 


C 




-4-> 




c 


3 


a 


CO 


JQ 








ca 




ro 


£ 


la. 




CD 


CD 





JC 


a 


ro 




+j 




c^ 


c 


5 




— 


T3 
CO 


CO 


c 


L_ 


L. 


ro 


CO 


ro 
O 


CO 



■^8o 

co ^ co 
co O co 
— 52 
co--'> 

C 5 )- 



£ ro- 
le ^ co 

O CD ^ 

qZE| 

2^3 



■2a;^ 
ro co •> 

3 W C 

■a co § 
cojc g 

co >>— 
2 o 
">-o+- 

^ COtj 
w -g CO 

^-5 

co5 
ro to -a 
>4- -3 c 
o o ca 



15 



c 


T3 

C 


00 


00 


03 


'->-' 


o 


a> 


~ 


> 

k. 
0) 


y 

> 


o 

03 


00 





O 


^_; 


00 


00 

O 


03 


c 
o 


£ 


00 

03 


■4-> 


o 

00 

c 
o 


00 

c 

CD 

E 


=3 
k. 

to 

c 
o 


>,<-> 


la 


03 

a 


o 

4-> 


!c .c 


a> 


o 


00 


c 


Q-o 


ffl 


CD 

x: 


O 


a> 






00 


00 


oo 


-t-> 


C 
OS 


C 
o 

00 


00 

O 
O 


CD 


a 


k. 

o 



oo en fe m ® w 6 -o 
5 .£■§«'>£?>? = 



f- 3 W 



O^ 



£X3 03 

■2 E c 



^£ Q-5 



g w o ■- 
S£ c o 
cc 01 

• §_ w •- .E x; 
cdx:^ 



±2 S 

co cdx:.^ (a u 

:£ „ c v> .q = sz -^z 

S[=E2i5§ & 

.£ CD <5 03 O . ot ^ 

£. a> ^ .h ^ 2 o -* 

k.X3»-O c: r> ,+ -03 



0: E 

00 (J 



03 ~~ 

.> o 

0) oo 

> _ 



OJ 



o.E 



Q-.E Ql oo oo JS E •+= 



CO 



a; c oo 
m «J 3 

r- «» £ 
•E O 03 

O0TJ ° 

p^ 



•*-« 0) -m 0) 

O 0)-P -t-> 

(1) C W r «I 

r- > k. s_ <D 

.= o ,_ CSZ 

<U fi. o o +- 



^ 2 oo O-C C 

O (0 i. r 

•o C i5 en 1 *- u 



« Q.' 



"3 ^ 

■*-•—. 00 ■*-■ ■*-; 



o (a f ^ o := 

oj 5 c " -yj T3 

^- .2 ro u c c 

O •= (U C OO 
'£03^££-S 

> 



oo XjJ £ 



03 >. 00 

•*-> X? 



3 y, 

a-a 
<y »- 



0) 


■o 


03 


C JC 




03 


+-' 


00 


to 


■a 

03 




o 


0) 


c 


** to 
D)C 


E 


c 


00 




+- 1 




LlJ 


ffl 


CD 

■o 




(U 






k. 


> 



03<N_ f£ 00 

■a w t> -o 

00 03 *- 03 £ 
•C 03 O J5 



> 03 

ojx: w 



oo .S 

E 



o o >- ro S c 

C %g > 03 O 3 

175 E 5 & o <u £ 



> 
o 

a 
« 

XI 

03 

i- 
03 

a 

E 
o 
o 
o 



(/> 0) 



™E7 

/n >— v_ 



■° ■ O « 

— ^_i O 03 

-cc/) o-o 
o 



s? 



O) 

0) £ r- ♦* 

^*g 

ST5 0.2 

03 O) O +- 

or o 03 

00 03 £• 

°5.Eh- 
a> 03 o 

o 0)-Q oo 
03 -O 

a> oo c )= 
-c-o 045 

■m i_ 00 T3 
_ 03 03 C 
.E T3 <D 03 

k(fl >;_ 
■— 03 T3 

=3 . <D 
O" a) -C T3 

a> c o C 

"III 



0>T3C0 
C <UKD 

5-00^ 

x: >^ 
o a) 



42 Etjx: C30O) 



o5 £ £ 



-o at: z 

£ S?« 

> ■ r- 

> u E 

T3 m_ 4_, 

0) O 00 

Q) 00 C 

8^S 

00 -m a> 

c: 



•5 £ w O) 00 0) 
-J 03 X 00 



a 51 00 00 
a) > 2 2 .2 

03 a3 w O-"03_ 



o'loi>oo§^ 

W) >■ -Up 03 C 

— _ •- O) ^> 03 o 
y) C 00 k. C 

a 03 a> -x C3> o «/) 



fi"6 o 
3 «5 

0^0. 

to 0) c 

4S"a3 5 
73 jr o 



r- ro _ 

, — ,E a> °o 

O 03 03 



— ^rn-^ a>t;oo303 1 -^J 

^E~»4SS ^co-oo.cE(s 



E.2- 



C?3 
- 0)" 

03 c c 

■gcS 

o o+3 

0) 



Q*« O) 
o 2.00 w c 



00 



00 



<D 



c'°2 

x; <u 00 

ti) 03 ^ 

00 o o 



D)T3 O C ^ y, t 

03 <u c 3 "o _a> a) 

C JSX2 2 -^ O- 



03 



Xi cd 



U 



u_ a) E ¥. c/) o .- 



S^-O.^^oo^ 

a^i. 0,0) E 

co 03 x: "-wSi 
03 O -K- CD -Q 

^1 >? k. 03 -^ <J -^ 
03 n +-> 00 3 — 
•O^ICO Q) 00 $ 



03 00 03 

.ti^ 00 

£ o>ca 

O) C W 00* 

o^ 00*^ 
o _ •— en 
o o <J "I 

"■J= 2 c ° 

s|l| 

03 a) '<- 2 
O) 00 c -»-» 



16 



c 
o 
a 

i 

CO 

o 

Q. 

o 



(0 

i_ 
•♦«■» 

</> 
'E 

"i 



GQ 

c 



03 



o 



a 
o 



o 

CO 

Q. 

E 
o 
a 



£-2 



c- c 



^*o 



c 9 % 



roc 5 

5-x: .5 > w 
t c -c c E co 



CO ■+-< 
0) 



o ca 



w £ 



- co 



u k. a) 

Eor 



o ^ P !5 c •- - 



_ o o « c 
? >% "~ o 

C .C.= >- 

ro (o °ti 
a> = c/>>'° 



HI 

<o ° a. 
w E o 

£ «"S 

-^ . . CO 



£ E o 
<o-§-o 
&"<» 

o: <5 S p i <2 (j o, 

> CU i_ 4_i JL. .£_ r- 

to c Q. to o to c 



o 

CD to CO 
.CXZ CO 
-M ■+-" CD 

5g| 

+^ C CO 

to .- Q- 

«*~ a 

2 0) <* 

„x: ci) 
'jc 

'5|o 

0) 



C -£- co 
,9 to-JTi 



cu ro 



0) 



a 



5 - £ 

w «> ro 



Ec™ 

a> o ro 



t-SJ 

CO 0) CO 

"~ CO 3 
>^ C 3 "m 
)S ° > 

2-oc 

U c CO 
CD (o . 

£ CO CTi 
(/) o 



3 ca;z: 



co It 



5 O C CD 
° w ° 

s- O -^ Q. 

Q-'4= {5 ca 
co-g E co 

oEEE 



E co 



CD 
r* 


c 




CO 




10 


CO 


CD 


CD 


a 


"co 

c 


c 






E 


C 




o 



LXJ CO 
> 



co .ca ® 



53*--cd~ 



o c 

CD W CO 
Li- CD -£ 

CO ■ M 
cr co Jr 

c r- CD 

CD ^ O 
^Q.CO 
CD 

°o 



CD 



O 
.E^J CD 

co S> 

«-+-> CO 

c w a 

COco^ 

+- >M3 
CO JD q, 

£"0 C 

co co 2 
CD 34= 

=3 ? CD 

d-.E O 

CD T3 ^ 

"■ 3 CD 
4- CO 



C CD >. 

"£"^ 

C0+-. 
CO c~ 
CD CD > 
s- CO CD 
° CO b 

— Q. 

C CD CO 
CO ^g 

.Eo > ■ 

±i *" CD-O 

3-a co c 

CO r- -j 

*- »55 



> CD 



in 



>^co5£ 
o to ■ ~ 

CO— CD CD 
"* CD CO CO 

CD > CO CO 

,_ £ co.cc: 



CD 



3 3 

a a. 



*- CO , ■ CD *± O 

o co w * c=^ 

oo-ri^ c c°. 

co £ t 5o 

« CD •_ T3 O O 

^ CO CO CO -< 

CO o CO co — o 





+-> 


u 


■*-> 


CO 


CM 




o 


c 


jc 


13 


+^ 


fc/> 




c 


0) 
Q. 


5 


CO 


o 


CD 




03 


CO 


st 


3 


^ 


-C 




E 


-t- 1 




o- 

CD 


cu 


k> 




CD 






i_ 


-t-j 


CD 




CO 


c 


5^ 


W 


+j 


"D 




03 


O 


'~ 


c 


c 




CO 
CO 




ro 


a 

> 

CD 


CD 

o 


3 
CO 




4J 


CO 


en 


•4-' 


■a 




ca 


CD 


i— i 


5 
o 


■a 


c 




-V' 

CO 


> 


03 
CD 


o 

-a 

CD 


3 


E 


CD 


CO 


>, 




CD 


"03 


cr 


CO 

m 


o 


cu" 

4-1 

CO 


c 

CO 


k. 
<D 
T3 


03 



CD .5 W CO c £ 3 



*- ca ^ co co 
«o|g-.E 

a E8"g?S 

•E a3 o c5 ^ co 
^ +- CD c a. 

£ u CDC7) CDCY) 



> 

O 


■a 

c 

CO 


co 


O 00 


CO 


a 


en 


"o 


la 


o 


o 


CD 


c 

k. 
o 


CD 
CO 
CO 

o 


o 

5 


J— 


T5 
CO 
CD 

+-* 
CO 

c 


CO 

c 


a 

CD 


c 


JS 


o 






-t-J 


>, 


"■ 


'co 




CO 


c 


+- 1 


CO 


"CD 


CD 


c 


CD 
CO 


CO 


c 


q: 


CO 


CD 


CO 


c 


CD 




CO 


E 


k. a» 


E 


CD 


CD 


CD 


o 






_^ 


JZX1 


+-> 






3 


+-> 





CO 






cr cj) 


"co 

-C 
CO 


k. 






CD 


c 


o 






k. 


"E 

CD 
O 


Q. 

CD 






"co 




CO 






to 


C JZ 


3 






>8 


5 








CO 


CO 


co" 


CO 






"co 
o 


-t- 1 

i_ 

o 

Cl 


■o 

c 

13 


CO 

k. 






<D 


o 


H— 


co 






cy) 

CD 


CD 


CO 
CD 
CJ 


-t-J 
0) 
k. 

o 

CD 
CO 






+-• CO 


> 

CD 






ca 




CO 


CO 






£ 


o 




sz 


co" 




■ |- ' 




s 


^ 


CO 




CO 


CO 


'u 


o 


CD 




CD 

2 


CD 

ca 


o 

CO 


CO 
CO 


en 

c 




"> 


+-< 




CO 


o 




OCT) 


o 


o 





Q_ CO co 



CD CD 

.c x: 



Cc56 ro cac 

CO k. >>^+-- CD 

■*-" CD co — — n 
>r to c J5 ca a- 
§._ C "S COO 
g-ca = vj <a^ 
>- o •- CO «2 ° 

3_ 3d)<2 5 

^C^co^iS^ 

E ^ >, co +- CO 
o o ca ^.-2 

to CD Si E C O 
co to o O CD Ql 

■5 3 « VEE 

^^WC >,— . 

co^x: C Q-co 

CO^-^ k. CO E 



5 D) CO lL f5 co E 
cr.E co -E ■= > 



17 



vol mioa^a) 



CO • 03 ^r CD CD 

>,>,co 
co£ 



■5*«£"a. 



■c « 2 



c <d ^ ° u o = ^£-- a 

a> .h to = £»■= o (0 <u CD -g "= +- T3 ^r 



S3 <d 



8 5 



I/) o 



J> .E a-M -Jco . 9-co 

■£ — CO .Q •— .^ (- F 

„, ca > 2 cd^_£x: c o 

Q.^ CT Q. (0 +3 03 Q. 3 



= ^-2^ cd 

C O (/) y) 



|I 
It 

>» 

co - 

> 

CD '■>-> 

e£ 

^ c 

?co 



° 2 



in 



O) o 






-C — +-< iz n 

O Q. 



en 

■ ~o 

o colt! <^ c c 

1i 



v) o 
"O o a) 

E- .£$* 

£o8t~ w 

Q-S c o £ fi 
^rE o o= 2 

cd > o «*V 
o. o to F_ c 
c c _ q 

m JS ^ ^ "K += 
O Q-° >,-Q jo 
+-< o> s- 3 2 
Q.2 E-2 OT .*: 

3 ±3 ^ <D iflf 






ca o 

CO -M 



CD 



o^^ E 



852255 



C CD 

53^0 
~ CD 



5 cr:p 



_ CD CD 

o o^zz &■£. u 
= "C « w «J a> 

.2 CO CO CD cc JZ 

+j q.— sz ■*-> +-> 
2^03-00 

■D Oo-Ot 

cd co x: x: •> 

i_ CD +-> •*-> > 



C <D 
CD O' 

y 

S.2 



b cd 



CD .J. 

T3-a 



(0 



p 


u 




CO 


a 






ro 


-t-j 


o 


CO 




3 


±i 


E 


o 




CL 


CO 


__ 


a 
u 


ro 


'> 


c 



ro EgS £ § 

c^-Q c c o 

CD +-' CO CO CO ^r 



CD CD i.-KT3 
Q. '^ 

co co c: co 

»» c *- CO '£Z 

^ -5 <5 ? co 



CO ^ 

CD 

j~ vZ 

O CD 

C 

CO CD 



-Q O) CD tO CO .._5" CD^CDH-CD 

SiS^g-g-oS'S £§.§■£ 

— o S 7 : ;43;cdo + -'cd 

C«_Cm-C0O u iz<-.CCD^ 

ra = CLRSSa)"E^5E™ 



v*-— CD C 




o O CO 
S; ^ Z3 CO 



CD f0 i 
CO "v) 



o 

co 
00 .tj C 

o 

'to 
> 



< CO 



c ®^Swc5« E-2 ■?,>,■ 

§-°c5 ro S^8>^^ 



D) CO 
CO 



<D~ 

■a E 



CO j-. tn C ffi C "C3 

^ E'^-E «J 

c S^ -a c •- **= s- 21 o 
m c c rojS — ^;cd^s= 
£ co co£t; 4Hcy) Era 



cd c: 



c o co 

CO CD 4- 
D.W O 

ro co'o 

«-. 5— CO 

r co o> 

O-C CD 

CD CO - 
+j 4- c 

J2 o 2 

r.E£ 

O ■*-• )- 

co ca .o 

CD 



>8og>« 

£ c c E o »- 
gj co .a ^ cd 
w C CO E "O-c 

CD ^ 'co =5 CD O 

■m — _n 



2^3 



5E-^ 



XJ CD J^"P < o 



c 
_ o. i- ca 

C C E £ CO CD 

<^caS.^E 



CD - 1 



ca cd o 

EoEi-o 






£ g co • - ^ 

mX 52 C " CD 

w . W .8S.^ 

.£8o££.2 

+- C CD ^^ "5. 

toc r c 



tu 

CD O 



oZ 



CO Q.O 



^ CD 

c^ I 
CD •- CO 



rc 



CD C O) 



fig's 

•5 ° <D 

cr.«2 ^ 
° > CO 
cc o o 



o — -o 

CD ^3 (Bt,^ ,_ 

ro cd w w « .2 

— A) CO +j 

fEc-^3 

aaiifl o c c 

Q.CLQ.2 CO 



q o Q-^ 



ro cn-c £ ° g3 •*- •- 
5" = =i«a§.g«o 



cu ^ F w 

CO "^ .11 O Q_t^ -E » 

© 2 > c a 5 © CD 

t-iCD^fOfn.riCD »- 

r:co^7;c> l/, ^ 



b co 2c/) 



E85S ^Elocl5 



£ 






CD 


J— 




H- 1 


c 
o 

+3 

C 
CD 


c 
o 


CO 


^_ 


d 


a 
o 

c 
ca 


ca 


CO 

C 
O 


ON 
CT> 

CNr-4 


i- 




CO 


<J 






3 


« 




CD 


6 


o 


CO 
CO 

ca 


■a 


C 

E 


X) 


CD 

CO 


o 

< 


CD 
TO 
> 


CT3 

ca co 

^ CD 


E 


c 

CO 


c 

r 


O 

a 


c 

CD 


£ 


ca 

CO 


v O 
a. co 


o 


E 


C 

■o 


o 

i_ 

a 


'o CD 
.E°- 




c 




'i_ 




CO 




CD 


CO 


Q. CO 


o 


Q. 


CO 


CD 






CO 

00 


E 


ca 
cr 

c 

CD 


> 

1- 
CD 
CO 


+- 1 
CD 

E 


C 
CD 

E 

c 

i- 


CD 

5 


c 


o 
c 
c 


TO 




cu 
> 
a 


0) 


£i 


o 

CO 


o 
co 


J= 


CO 
CD 


a: 


03 


•— 


CD 


■f- 1 


■t-' 




SI 


CD 

CL 


JZ 


i 


c 



CO 




■o 




>r, 




ca 




■a 




c 




ta 




4-> 




CO 




" 


5 


s 


CO 


c 


_— 


e 

CO 


c 

CD 


a 


CO 


a. 


CD 




Q. 


c4 


CO 


ih 


CO 




CD 




E 




ca 





o 


CD 

•— 


03 


E 


CD 

u 

c 

(0 

c 

03 

•4— • 

c 


ca 


"t- 1 


ra 


CD 
CO 

■a 
o 

s- 

■M 

CD 


CO 

ca 

CO 

'co 

en 
X3 


o 

> 
i- 

cc 

CO 
CO 


CO 

o 
a 

CD 

x: 
+- 1 


E 


'ra 

E 




CD 
O 

CD 


o 


x: 




CD 


C 


c 


o 

Z3 


"O 

c 


E 


03 


o 


CO 


ca 


ca 


XJ 


ra 


03 

CO 


+j 




O 


^ 


c 


c 




03 


3 


CD 


o 


>, 


O. 


c 


E 


CO 


ra 


o 


+j 


CO ^~ 


03 


c 


CO 




CD 


i_ 


2 


03 


5 


■c 


O 

a 

00 


o 


"c^ 


03 


C 


■><_ 


4-J 


+■« 


CO 




W 


CO 


4-1 


CD 


CD 


CO 


CD 


CO 


J= 


■o 


CD 


03 


"a3 

c 
c 


*^ 


c 


'3 


sz 




CO 


a* o o"o 


cu 


CD 


■I- 1 


CO 


c 


D. 


cc 


cr 
C 


CD 

n 


3 
O 


O 

CL 



18 



o 
o 



03 

co 
o 

a 
o 



"■^ 

03 

^. 
+-> 

"E 
E 

< 

5 

o 

+■» 

03 

C 

o 

</> 

si- 
rs 



to 

c 
.2 

'In 

■> 
o 
i- 
Q. 

CO 

o 
o 



</> 

."2 
'o 

o 



o 

CO 

'Z 

03 
Q. 

E 

o 
o 



^N 




1—1 




CO 




O 




CO 




co 




^^ 




"to 




V) 









Q. 




O 




k_ 




a 




c 









'-t-" 




CO 












CO 




'E 








E 




T3 




< 






M 




*■» 




C 




O 




E 




0) 




- — 








3 




a- 









oc 


_ 


•H* 


— 


C 


'n 


O 


<u 


E 




CO 


ro 


CO 


c 


Q> 





CO 


CO 


CO 


M- 


< 


rx 


■0 


O 


c 


i-H 


CO 




4* 








■0 




3 




< 









+- 




(0 




*-» 




CO 




. 




00 




iH 


5 




(a 








4_i 




3 




a> 




CO 









i- 




a. 


1 



CO 03 (0 2 

c-'.Q £ 
o 



„ o 



o _ 



ID 



o « © " . 

> c E 00 -o 

«n 8 a> c w 

0) o CO J= ~ 

** u ro c : D 

C « (C — 

■r -9 ^ a <u 



or; 
o c 



o 

3.C 3 



(0 Om OO 



■a co ^^ 

ill* 

!§,£ = 
E «-±; o 

jo ^g o 

a; oj^ 

COc75.^£ 

3; 03 o 



C Q) 



co .4-. y, 



C o w <u 

■ot-^o-c to 



5^E a) « 



CO 
CO 

T3 yt «' CO 

03 4- _ O O ^ 

coo &>-= Q-TO 

c c: Q. q) +-> 

© E 5 E *- =5 

^2"§'(D2g 



o o 

CO <n 

Eg 
3- 

o o 

■D 



^T3 



« 0) 

*^ i_ 

C 0) 

.2-^co 

.E|§ 

co 



■*-> CO 4_< 

a) o »- 

-D C.O 

■> ° 
oO 

Q. o 



cu co 

51 



CO 



O 

u 

u 

— J- 03 
<° Q-o) 

^E> 
3 O _£ 

Eof 

_ CD — 
C jc 03 
03 +- JC 
Q.T3 w 

• ss 



iS^ 



ro ^_co 
3 <u o 

03 i_ CO 



.3 co 

3 0) 

»- T3 

§8 

^*- 

O co 

Z 00 

0) 

CO 



3 *- — — a; j- o = £ -u c 

-O. ^ ._ /, < +- ^ _0 +-> r- — 



5 co <D 



3r8« l 5.E'-5« 



+ J L=o~a3_ ! >-.i:~oo 
g g-vc a«3 0"Sg 

^--^^OJ-'COW 
03 



a. a) _ _ 

>^<ucoco n3 ^ — 




03 ^ C C 3 C q.^- ro c 

4L ras fsf|8 

<D ^ 3 O-D £ CO "■• 

=:m-^o3^oc:^; 

03 1- $ CO D""^3 O 03 00 



«g o _. 

c<E 

3 > C 



- <U <D O 



||*5 E 2 

O.E— o o 



to 
co Jr 3 

0) 3 03 

>co o y^S-ro > 



o 



03 CO 



^<^LO 



CD — -C 
CO 03 I 

03 "*~^ +J Q) 3- 






3-0 

E = 

II 

Q.-0 

_ c 

03 ro 

.E 5 

s- O 

+- o 

? c 

+^ 

^ Q. 

o X 
.i= o 

IS 



_ ^ > Q. 

2 03 aj ^ 
o a> 00 
o >„_ -3 

^^coS 
^co>°. 



^^■^ c 



■D r -O c +j < a 
CO c O a) — «>. . 

W O- 03 >• ■- u-C 
« «-H ^00 03 



03 ^2 



~ ^^ O 
03 -0*-3 

03 a> cc^ 

U Q. © 

+j ^ o o 

V- oo • - ■ - 
03 O) o 3 

co.i£ c 03 



J- AID C CD <U 
3^ CU 03 £.3 

03 +■" P c £ 



Sg 
E£ 

U 03 

2- 

h- CO = O - 03 . W 
O - 03 •— -- 1^ ^"n ^1 



^_ J5 co o 'c q3 ^ 



„ > a « 



>^>r2 



•^ cc-o 
E S^ 



? "° ^ * ^ m ^^ 



CO y, 00 _ 

+-_^ .3^-- O 0) 

CO 03 W ^U 

<" o 3 c O dJ ^ u 

<D.2 3aJ(T)toLl-CO 

*** "*™ -3 ~ 

5 O C £ to 'c0 O JQ 

(UorrCU^i^cO 
0:^1-33—^0313 

4J 1/) 0+ J + J + J r 
O = O CO CO CO 3 



> C £ 

oi?. al 

CO 0) -C 

a) co 5 
co 5-0 
gig 
■>g| 

£ co c a. 
*-.c 0-0 

O co ~ a) 

3 -° 3 o 

'5 => co a. 

w O.Q.S 

a) to >< °- 
-Ic^ 
5 °3 E 



03 CO 3 *r. c *^ 5 
^J 4) 5^3 



19 



5-o . 

l/> <D C 

E > o 

CD '*-> 

<o o cc 

3 *- co 
cr "q. 
£.{2 x 

*- c a> 
2 2 c 

c E( ° 
M E"° 

Kl 

lit 



O) X .- C/) </> CD O) 

c-° -oflJcrc 

EE 8££t;2 
■°2 TIDIES 

s- *- O CDT3 — 

£ S3 -If 

B% .2? ,.75.2 

k. 4? a a. co cd •£ a. 

fflO+=3.E3E llJ 

£ a> >^E | w g-o w 
f - fc ii4->c: r .co> ( -i- 

aT=.2<u ?&:ȣ? 



o.q*3 






O c aj^^r co = 

^ +-. T3 4_. dj CO 




■Q~S<or offg) 5 <D 



+5 O) C0"O Q-33 



aJOro x u (l; 5 



3 

< 

o 



3 

<y 
as 



ra 

CD 

a 

CD 

en 



zz «l <u <d to 
-" o ^ w o 
0) q.-^C/) > 

i-+3 (i).5 ,- 

©« in 
£g> 

•2 « 0) 
St w 

2 <->- 
O.E-S 

'o </> cd 

cd ■«= 
o. </>■»- 

«.Eo 

o«w 



— w 
o ~ 

>,o 

CO '43 

Sco 



JC o 
o 

33 CD 



(0 

._ "^ <y 

v) rc « 
ri +-> co 

E CD ei 



— c 
■^5 2 

C X o 

o <u ° 



10 "^ -M 

goo 

g&E 

> T3 CO 

Lug >, 

X+J F 
<y 1? cd cd 

I 5 * 2 
££8§ 

air .a 



20 



o 




o 


r-\ 


1 


i-i 




tf> 




O 


03 


CO 


(/> 




o 


a) 


Q. 


N - / 


© 


"ro 


&- 


w 


a. 


o 


c 


o 


o 


Q. 






+m) 


C 


03 


o 


V, 




+■» 


CO 


tf> 


v. 

■*-> 


E 


(/) 


■— 


E 


E 


E 


13 


TJ 


< 


< 



00 

o 

TO 

c 

CO 
*t 



U3 



cr a a> »- ro o . 



CD Q. 



<U c in +-> o 

"£ o ro -o cn 

>:°^^ 

m x a> o 2 ,„ o 

5 «_ c s- co ■+-' 
2 a> o ° o o 2 
^ 5= .->•£ 



ro 



ca ^- L. 



£ w c ■- o w ' 

tr o) o o co o -a 

j£ ro j= « o 



<C.E£ o£.c 




CO 

'<3 

o 

CO 



03 

Q. 

E 
o 
o 



Appendix B 



Description of Senate Child Care Bill (H.R. 9803) 



DESCRIPTION OF CHILD CARE BILL (H.R. 9803), AS PASSED BY 

THE SENATE 

Earlier this year, the Committee on Finance recommended and the 
Senate approved legislation which would retain the basic Federal child 
care standards in the new social services legislation but would provide 
additional Federal funding to assist States in meeting those standards, 
would increase tax incentives for hiring welfare recipients in child care jobs, 
and would permit waiver of the Federal standards in certain instances. This 
bill was permanent as passed by the Senate but, for procedural reasons 
related to the Congressional Budget Act, the House agreed to the legisla- 
tion (with some modifications) on a temporary basis through September 30, 
1976. This bill was vetoed by the President, and, on May 5, 1976, the 
Senate sustained the veto by a vote of 60 to 34. 

Additional Federal Funding for Child Care 

The Social Services Amendments of 1974 require that child care services 
funded under the social services program meet certain minimum Federal 
standards with respect to staffing and other matters. Though compliance 
with these standards will increase the cost of providing child care services 
in many States, the 1974 legislation did not increase the $2.5 billion limita- 
tion on Federal social services funding which was imposed in 1972. To 
help States meet the costs of complying with these standards, the bill 
would provide for increasing the maximum allowable funding under the 
program by $250 million per year. The new funding would be available 
only for child care and would be available to match State expenditures on an 
80 percent matching basis (as compared with 75 percent for most other 
social services programs). Until fiscal year 1978, 20 percent of the ad- 
ditional Federal funding provided by the bill would be reserved for alloca- 
tion by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare to those 
States determined to have particular funding problems related to comply- 
ing with Federal child care standards. (See table 3, page 28.) 

Tax Credit for Employing Welfare Recipients in Child Care 

The bill was designed to encourage States to meet the Federal child care 
staffing requirements by employing welfare recipients. It broadened in 
several respects the present tax credit of 20 percent of the wages paid to 
a welfare recipient or former welfare recipient (with a maximum annual 
credit of $1,000 per employee). For child care providers, it made the tax 

(23) 



24 

credit available through 1980 and provided that it will be available on a 
refundable basis so as to benefit all providers, including public and non- 
profit providers and those with little or no tax liability. (The temporary 
version of the legislation agreed to by the House of Representatives and 
subsequently vetoed would have eliminated the provision for providing 
the tax credit on a refundable basis to non-profit and public providers. 
Instead, the vetoed bill would have allowed States to make an equivalent 
grant to such providers out of the new social services funding made available 
by the bill.) The bill also authorized States to use some of the additional 
social services funding provided by the bill to match the tax credit in such 
a way as to provide full Federal funding of the costs of hiring welfare 
recipients as child care employees up to a maximum salary of $5,000 per 
year. 

Waiver of Standards in Certain Cases 

The bill modified the child care standards to permit State welfare agencies 
to waive the Federal staffing requirements in the case of child care centers 
and group day care homes which meet State standards if the children 
receiving federally funded care represent no more than 20 percent of the 
total number of children served (or, in the case of a center, there are no 
more than 5 such children), provided that it is infeasible to place the 
children in a facility which does meet the Federal requirements. 

Modification of Family Day Care Home Requirements 

The 1974 law incorporates a requirement that a family day care home 
serve no more than 6 children including the family day care mothers' own 
children under age 14. The Senate bill modified this requirement so that 
the family day care mother's own children would be counted only if they 
are under age 6. 

Social Services for Addicts and Alcoholics 

The Senate bill would also have made permanent certain changes in 
the social services statute, as it pertains to services for addicts and alcoholics, 
which had been adopted in Public Law 94—120 on a temporary basis 
(through January 31, 1976). 

One of these changes makes explicit certain confidentiality requirements 
in the case of services provided to addicts and alcoholics. Another change 
clarifies that the entire rehabilitative process must be considered in deter- 
mining whether medical services provided to addicts and alcoholics can be 
funded as being an integral part of a social services program. A third 
change allows funding of a 7-day detoxification period even though social 
services funding is generally not available to institutionalized persons. 



Appendix C 
Tables 



TABLE l.-ESTI MATED FEDERAL SHARE OF STATE EXPENDI- 
TURES FOR SOCIAL SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1977 

[In millions] 

Full allocation 

under $2.5 Amount to be 

billion limit « used by State 2 

Total $2,500,000 $2,368,568 

Alabama 42.300 36.335 

Alaska 3.975 3.975 

Arizona 25.450 10.470 

Arkansas 24.375 18.787 

California 247.250 247.250 

Colorado 29.525 29.525 

Connecticut 36.525 36.525 

Delaware 6.775 6.775 

District of Columbia 8.550 8.550 

Florida 95.675 95.675 

Georgia 57.725 57.725 

Guam .553 

Hawaii 10.025 10.025 

Idaho 9.450 9.450 

Illinois 131.650 131.650 

Indiana 63.025 38.284 

Iowa 33.775 33.775 

Kansas 26.850 21.536 

Kentucky 39.700 39.700 

Louisiana 44.525 44.525 

Maine 12.375 12.375 

Maryland 48.425 48.425 

Massachusetts 68.600 68.600 

Michigan 107.575 107.575 

Minnesota 46.325 46.325 

Mississippi 27.475 7.732 

Missouri 56.500 30.942 

Montana 8.700 8.700 

Nebraska 18.250 18.250 

Nevada 6.775 3.356 

(26) 



27 

TABLE l.-ESTI MATED FEDERAL SHARE OF STATE EXPENDI- 
TURES FOR SOCIAL SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEAR 1977-Con. 

[In millions] 



New Hampshire 

New Jersey 

New Mexico 

New York 

North Carolina. , 

North Dakota... 

Ohio 

Oklahoma 

Oregon 

Pennsylvania... 

Puerto Rico 

Rhode Island... 
South Carolina. 
South Dakota... 
Tennessee 

Texas 

Utah 

Vermont 

Virgin Islands. . 
Virginia 

Washington 

West Virginia... 

Wisconsin 

Wyoming 



Full allocation 

under $2.5 

billion limit 1 


Amount to be 
used by State 2 


$9,550 
86.700 
13.275 
214.200 
63.425 


$9,550 
86.700 
13.275 
214.200 
52.175 


7.525 

126.975 

32.050 

26.800 

139.975 


5.669 

126.975 

32.050 

26.800 

139.975 




18.282 


11.075 

32.925 

8.075 

48.825 


11.075 

32.925 

8.075 

39.774 


142.500 

13.875 

5.550 


142.500 

13.875 

5.550 

.533 


58.050 


39.746 


41.100 

21.175 

54.000 

4.250 


41.100 

16.144 

54.000 

4.250 



1 The State allocations are determined annually on a population basis. 

2 HEW has estimated, for budget purposes, that in fiscal year 1977 the States 
have underestimated their use of reimbursable funds by $31,432,000, which 
brings their budget request to $2,400,000,000. 



Source: U S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. 



28 

TABLE 2.-FEDERAL INCOME LIMITS ON ELIGIBILITY FOR 
SOCIAL SERVICES (FISCAL 1977-FAMILY OF 4) 1 



Maximum income level for 
services 



If no fee is 

charges 2 

(80 percent 

of median 

income) 



If a fee is 

charged 

(115 percent 

of median 

income) 



Alabama $10,244 $14,726 

Alaska 3 14,747 22,273 

Arizona 12,184 17,515 

Arkansas 9,512 13,674 

California 12,745 18,321 

Colorado 12,503 17,973 

Connecticut 13,181 18,947 

Delaware 12,185 17,516 

District of Columbia 12,074 17,357 

Florida 1 1,830 17,006 

Georgia 10,933 15,716 

Hawaii 13,655 19,629 

Idaho 1 1,260 16, 186 

Illinois 13,080 18,803 

Indiana 1 1,582 16,650 

Iowa 1 1,497 16,527 

Kansas 11,516 16,554 

Kentucky 10,011 14,391 

Louisiana 10,080 14,490 

Maine 10,042 14,435 

Maryland 13,320 19,148 

Massachusetts 12,504 17,975 

Michigan 12,939 18,600 

Minnesota 12,634 18,161 

Mississippi 9,250 13,296 

Missouri 1 1,016 15,836 

Montana 10,949 15,739 

Nebraska 10,691 15,369 

Nevada 12,286 17,661 

New Hampshire 11,189 16,084 

New Jersey 13,382 19,236 

New Mexico 9,714 13,694 

New York 12,135 17,444 

North Carolina 10,546 15,160 

North Dakota 12,004 17,256 



29 

TABLE 2.-FEDERAL INCOME LIMITS ON ELIGIBILITY FOR 
SOCIAL SERVICES (FISCAL 1977-FAMILY OF 4) *— Con. 



Maximum income level for 


services 




If no fee is 


If a fee is 


charges 2 


charged 


(80 percent 


(115 percent 


of median 


of median 


income) 


income) 


$12,097 


$17,389 


10,116 


14,542 


12,010 


17,265 


11,591 


16,662 


11,523 


16,565 


10,444 


15,013 


10,259 


14,748 


10,230 


14 706 


11,139 


16,013 


11,202 


16,103 


10,516 


15,117 


12,104 


17,400 


12,321 


17,711 


10,055 


14,454 


12,318 


17,708 


11,866 


17,058 



Ohio 

Oklahoma 

Oregon 

Pennsylvania.. 
Rhode Island.. 

South Carolina 
South Dakota.. 

Tennessee 

Texas 

Utah 

Vermont 

Virginia 

Washington. . . 
West Virginia.. 

Wisconsin 

Wyoming 



1 The median income levels are adjusted each year by HEW using data supplied by 
the Census Bureau. The national median income level was raised from $13,801 
for fiscal 1976 to $14,747 for fiscal 1977. 

2 States may impose fees subject to HEW regulation but need not. About half the 
States do so. 

8 100 percent of national median income. The income limit for services without a 
fee is 100 percent of the national median income where that amount is lower than 
80 percent of State median income. (80 percent of Alaska State median income is 
$15,494.) 

Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. 



30 

TABLE 3.-SENATE CHILD CARE BILL-ADDITIONAL ANNUAL 

FEDERAL FUNDING 

[In millions] 

Total $250,000 

Alabama 4.230 

Alaska .398 

Arizona 2.545 

Arkansas 2.438 

California 24.725 

Colorado 2.952 

Connecticut 3.652 

Delaware .678 

District of Columbia .855 

Florida 9.568 

Georgia 5.772 

Hawaii 1.002 

Idaho .945 

Illinois 13.165 

Indiana 6.302 

Iowa 3.378 

Kansas 2.685 

Kentucky 3.970 

Louisiana 4.452 

Maine 1.238 

Maryland 4.842 

Massachusetts 6.860 

Michigan 10.758 

Minnesota 4.632 

Mississippi 2.748 

Missouri 5.650 

Montana .870 

Nebraska 1.825 

Nevada .678 

New Hampshire .. .955 

New Jersey 8.670 

New Mexico 1.328 

New York 21.420 

North Carolina 6.342 

North Dakota .752 

Ohio 12.698 

Oklahoma 3.205 

Oregon 2.680 

Pennsylvania 13.998 

Rhode Island 1.108 



31 

TABLE 3.— SENATE CHILD CARE BILL— ADDITIONAL ANNUAL 
FEDERAL FUNDING-Continued 

[In millions] 

South Carolina $3,292 

South Dakota .808 

Tennessee 4.882 

Texas 14.250 

Utah : 1.388 

Vermont .555 

Virginia 5.805 

Washington 4. 1 10 

West Virginia 2.118 

Wisconsin 5.400 

Wyoming .425 

TABLE 4.-ESTI MATED DISTRIBUTION OF TITLE XX SOCIAL 
SERVICES EXPENDITURES 



Percent of all 

title XX 

Type of service expenditures 1 

Day care services for children 25 

Information and referral, protective services for 

children and protective services for adults 20 

Home based services 12 

Family planning 3 

Transportation services 2 

Day care services for adults 2 

Legal services 2 

Congregate/home delivered meals 1 

Other 2 33 

1 Based on analysis of State plans for fiscal year 1976. 

2 Other services include services to alcohol and drug abusers, health and mental 
health services, adoption, emergency shelter, and services to the development- 
ally disabled and blind. 

Source: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. 



32 



TABLE 5.-CHILD CARE CENTERS: MINIMUM' STAFFING 
REQUIREMENTS, BY AGE OF CHILDREN, UNDER STATE! 
LICENSING REGULATIONS 



Maximum number of children per staff member 1 if age of 
children is-— 



Under 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 4 to 5 5 to 6 



School 
ape- 



Alabama 5 

Alaska 5 

Arizona 3 8 

Arkansas * 6 

California 6 4 

Colorado 7 5 

Connecticut 4 

Delaware J3 n 5 

District of 

Columbia 15 4 

Florida 17 10 6 

Georgia J? 7 

Hawaii -°X 

Idaho 21 6 

Illinois 6 

Indiana . - ! 4 

Iowa 4 

Kansas..,. ,. - :, 3 

Kentucky 6 

Louisiana 30 .. -° 6 

Maine 32 2U X 

Maryland 33 NS 

Massachusetts 34 10 

Michigan 20 X 

Minnesota..... 40 4 

Mississippi NS 

See footnotes at end of table. 



'5 


10 


20 


"20 


2 22 


5 


10 


10 


10 


10 


10 


15 


20 


25 


25 


5 6 


12 


15 


18 


NS 


12 


12 


12 


12 


12 


s 7 


10 


12 


15 


15 


4 


y 5 


y 7 


9 7 


10 10 


i2g 


15 


20 


20 


25 


is 4 


8 


10 


15 


15 


12 


15 


20 


25 


25 


10 


15 


18 


20 


»25 


10 


15 


20 


25 


25 


22 8 


10. 


10 


10 


NS 


8 


10 


23 10 


25 


25 


5 


10 


12 


15 


20 


6 


8 


12 


.15 


15 


-' 3 5 


10 


27 10 


27 10 


16 


8 


10 


12 


15 


28 15 


12 


14 


16 


20 


25 


31 8 


10 


' 15 


15 


15 


6 


10 


10 


13 


NS 


1 10 


3.-, 10 


30 10 


15 


3 s 15 


' 10 


10 


12. 


20 


NS 


41 7 


10 


10 


10 


15 


NS 


NS 


NS 


NS 


-20 X 



33 



TABLE 5.-CH1LD CARE CENTERS: MINIMUM STAFFING 
REQUIREMENTS, BY AGE OF CHILDREN, UNDER STATE 
LICENSING REGULATIONS-Continued 





Maximum number of children 


per staff 


member 1 


if age of 








children is — 


















School 




Under 2 


2 to 3 


3 to 4 


4 to 5 


5 to 6 


age 


Missouri , 


. . 20 X 
MS 


5 
NS 


10 

NS 


10 

NS 


15 

NS 


15 


Montana 


NS 


Nebraska 


4 


5 


/ 


♦7 


7 


12 


Nevada 


. . "4 


43 g 


"10 


"10 


"10 


'« 3 


New Hampshire. 


4 


46 4 


10 


15 


18 


20 


New Jersey , 


, . 20 X 


< 7 NS 


^NS 


«NS 


4 <NS 


20 X 


New Mexico 


10 


10 


15 


* s 15 


4S 15 


15 


New York 


40 A 

V. i0 8 


5 

o0 12 




7 
50 20 


s® 25 


10 


North Carolina... 


so 25 


North Dakota 


4 


4 


10 


10 


12 


si 12 


Ohio 


.. 52 8 


10 


15 


15 


20 


20 


Oklahoma 53 


.. M 4 


S 


12 


15 


15 


20 


Oregon 


53 4 


10 


10 


10 


10 


56'10 


Pennsylvania 


.. 20 X 


20 X 


8 


10 


10 


13 


Rhode Island 


. . 20 X 


20 X 


10 


1.5 


25 


NS 


South Carolina.., 


6 


8 


10 


14 


15 


15 


South Dakota 


,. 57 1 


4 


5 


"7 


/ 


55 15 


Tennessee 


■ rj 5 


8 


10 


15 


25 


60 30 


Texas 


. . CI 4 


8 


12 


15 


18 


62 2 


Utah- .,'.: 


. ; 2o x 


10 


15 


lo 


20 


63 2 


Vermont 


4 


5 


10 


10 




12 


Virginia 


e; 5 


10 
"7 


10 


1 Q 

10 


3.0 

to 


10 


Washington 


10 


West Virginia...; 


4 


8 


JL \J 


1 o 

a. : . 


j.. *j 


16 


Wisconsin 


.. CG 3 


cv 5- 


10 


19 


16 


60 16 


Wyoming 

•- — . 


5 


o 

O 


10 


15 


20 


25 



Footnotes on following pages. 



34 

FOOTNOTES 

1 5 if 2 to 2!^; 10 if 2% to 3. 
922 if 6 to 8; 25 if 8 and over. 

5 3 if Oto 15 mo; 10 if 15 moto2yr. 

* In infant-toddler centers. 

$ 6 in infant-toddler centers; 12 if 2 ! ■■ to 3 in other centers. 

6 In infant centers. 

7 I f 6 weeks to 8 mo in infant center; or if 12 mo to 3 yr in toddler center. 

* 7 if all 2-yr-olds in toddler center; 8 if 2}« to 3 in large or small center, 
s Recommended FIDCR child/staff ratios. 

Jo If under .title XX funding; 15, if 6 to 10 yr of age; 20 if 10 to 14yr of age (FIDCR 
ratios). 

J" 5 if to 1; 8 if 1 to 2, 

12 8 if 2to2. ! .:; 15 if 2- ■ to 3. 

33 In Delaware, centers receiving Federal funds have the following mandated 
ratios: Under 2: 5; 2 to 3: 5; 3 to 4: 5; 4to5: 7; 5 to 6: 7; school age: 10* 

24 Pending issue of new infant center regulations. 

"4 if 2 to 2 T ;--; S if 2' -to 3. 

«6 if under 1 yr; 8 if 1 to 2. 

i" Mandated ratio for handicapped children: Under 2: 4; 2 to 3: 6; 3 to 4: 8; 
4 to 5: 10; 5 to 6: 14; school age: 14. 

^ s 7- if to 13 mo; 10 if 18 mo to 2 yr. 

33 '25 if 7 and ever; 6 to 7 not specified. 

~° Children in this age group generally not accepted. 

- J 6 if Oto 13 mo; 8 if 18 mo to 2 yr. 

--8 if 2to2 : ;; 10 if 2) • to 3. 

23 10 if full-day; 20 if half-day. 

~ 4 4 if 6 weeks-walking; 5 if walking— 2. 

- 3 3 if 2 weeks— non walking under 24 moonly; 5 if walking— 2yr: 

'- 6 5 if walking— 2 l > 7 if 2^ to 3. 

27 10 if full-day; 12 if part-day. 

2s 15 if 6 to 8; 20 if Sand over. 

29 6 if nonwalking; 8 if toddlers. 

30 Centers serving 10 children wit!"! no more than 2 children under 2yrof agehaVft- 
mandated child/staff ratio of 10 to i in a!i age categories. 

»;8if2 I £to3yr. 

32 In Maine, separate before and after school programs have 10'tol ratio in SCbOOf 
age category. 



35 

FOOTNOTES— Continued 

33 Admitted only upon approval of local health officer. 

3< Admitted only upon prior approval. 

35 10 in care over 3 hr; 12 in care 3 hr or less. 

35 10 in care over 3 hr; 13 in care 3 hr or less. 

37 15 in care over 3 hr; 25 in care 3 hr or less. 

33 15 if 6 to 7 in care over 3 hr; 25 if 6 to 7 in care 3 hr or less. ■ 

39 10 if 2^ to 3. 

40 4 if 6 weeks to 16 mo; 7 if 16 mo to 2 yr. 
«7if 2yrto31 mo; 10 if 31 mo to 3 yr.' 

* 2 4 if 6 weeks to 9 mo; 6 if 9 to IS mo; S if 13 moto2yr. 
• 1! 8in infant-toddlercenter; lOfor lst20 children; 15 for excess over 20, 
** 10 for 1st 20 children; 15 for excess over 20. 

45 3 or 10 percent over licensed capacity, whichever is greater, if before or after- 
school care. 
4C 4.8 if maximum of 24 children under 3 yr of age in care. 
4 " 2 adults for any total group. 
•• s 20 if in care 3 hr or less. 
•* 9 4 if under 13 mo; 5 if over IS mo. 
- 50 ' If 30 or more in care; 10 if less than 30. 
. 31 lf4to7yr. 

» 2 8 if to 18 mo; 10 if 18 mo to 2 yr. 
53 Recommended ratios. 
s* 4 if to 10 mo in cribs; 6 if 10 mo to 2 yr. 
m If 6 weeks to 30 mo. 
iS If 6 yr; 15 if over 6 yr. 

« 1 if to 6 mo; 3 if 6 to 18 mc; 4 if 18 mo.to2yrJ 
"15 if 6 to 10 yr; 20 if 10 to 14. 
« 5 if 6 weeks to 1 yr; 6 if 1 to 2. 
••If 6 to 7] 

61 4 if to 18 mo; 6 if IS mo to 2 yr. 
•2 20 if 6 to 8; 25 if 8 or over. 
* 20 if 6; 25 if 7 to 15. 
«5'if 1 motolyr;7if 1 to 2. 
« 7 if 2 to 2}S; 10 if 2y 2 to 3. 
«3}f6tol;4iflto3. 
« 6 if 2 to 2#; 8 if 2)1 to 3. 

Source: Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Current as of October 21„ 
1975. 

Note: NS indicates "not specified." 



36 



TABLE 6.— STATE ESTIMATES OF INCREASE IN COST AND STAFF- 
ING FOR CHILD CARE FROM FISCAL 1975 TO FISCAL 1976 





Increased — 
title XX 
costs 
(millions) 


Increased staffing 


Potential 

employment 

of welfare 

recipients 

as percent 

of added 

staffing 




For 

title XX 

children 


For non- 
title XX 
children 


Total.......... 


$206.3 .. 
















Alabama 


0.6 
1.4 

2.6 

20.7 

2.4 

( 8 ) 

.9 

.4 
12.1 

3.8 
.4 

1.1 

23.5 

1.4 

2.0 

1.2 
2.6 

.1 



5.3 

7.0 

11.0 

1.0 

2.5 
.9 
.3 
.1 
.2 


122 

150 

548 





400 



99 

56 
766 

600 
60 

( 2 ) 
700 
215 

167 
202 
400 
509 




600 

959 

1,760 



1,246 

1,000 

155 

5 160 

40 


(0 
o 

( 3 



200 


(0 

81 
1,036 

C) 
1,577 

( 2 ) 

10 7,000 

( 2 ) 
(0 

303 

800 

437 








1,580 
' 

( 2 ) 
(0 

5 160 
•50 


( 2 ) 


Alaska 

Arizona 

Arkansas 

California 

Colorado 


5(5 
20-25 

( !> 
O 

( 2 ) 
C) 
(0 

20 

o 

80 
20 


Connecticut. 

Delaware 


District of Colum- 
bia 

Florida 

Georgia 

Hawaii . 


Idaho 

Illinois , 


« 


Indiana , 


o 


Iowa 

Kansas,.. m , 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 


8 
ifl 


Maine 


C) 


Maryland 

Massachusetts... 
Michigan . 


( 3 ) 

100 
20 


Minnesota 

Mississippi , 

Missouri 


20 

C) 
5 


Montana 


7-10 


Nebraska 

Nevada 

.New Hampshire.. 

See footnotes at er 


100 

( 2 ) 

20 



37 



TABLE 6.— STATE ESTIMATES OF INCREASE IN COST AND STAFF- 
ING FOR CHILD CARE FROM FiSCAL 1975 TO FISCAL 1976— Cent. 



Potential 

employment 

Increased staffing of welfare 

Increased recipients 

title XX For For nor.- as oercent 

costs title XX title XX of added 

(millions) children children staffing 

New Jersey 3.7 92 10 100 

Mew Mexico 2.2 96 50 

New York 12.0 300 67 

North Carolina.... 9.8 1,800 400 60-70 

North Dakota ( 7 ) o ( 3 ) 

Ohio 0) ( 2 > 

Oklahoma 21.5 1,022 2,366 93 

Oregon .2 ( 3 ) 

Pennsylvania 8.2 235 171 96 

Rhode Island .9 46 138 ( 2 ) 

South Carolina.... 2.4 308 25-50 

South Dakota .6 650 IsO 23 

Tennessee..- 1.7 200 f 1 ) 5-8 

Texas 16.2 1,720 1,514 20-30 

Utah ' 1.4 199 739 70 

Vermont .8 428 (1) 75 

Virginia....'...,.,. 7.8 436 1,000 50 

Washington 4.7 1,300 (-) (*) 

West Virginia 2.0 216 84 80-100 

Wisconsin 2.6 234 750 50-100 

Wyoming .6 75 



1 Included in estimates for columns 1 and 2. Unable to show separately, 

2 Unable to estimate. 

3 Not applicable since State estimates no additional staffing needs. 

4 Additional employees already hired. 

5 Unable to estimate on a man-year basis; represents number o.f staff. 
* Estimates cover urban counties only. 

7 Less than $50,000. 

8 Unable to estimate. No increased staffing but some increased cost to meet Other 
Standards and/or monitoring and reporting requirements of title XX. 

d Unable to estimate numbers; cost estimated at $1,900,000. 
w Includes a need for 6.000 new family day care hemes. 

Source; Committee staff survey of Governors. 



UNIVERSITY 0F | f | V|,™|f|||||l||ll 

l "™' 3 1262 09113 0624